I found Howard's layout of why investing in social networks and online communities is valuable to be most interesting in chapter three.  Specifically, I really enjoyed the point that these networks can be used to locate demand for specific products and help develop new ideas straight from the mouth of the consumer.  Howard describes this as "identifying customer needs and new product opportunities".  The fact that this process, if done the traditional way, costs large sums of time and money resonated with me because while there may be some initial resistance to the current technological movement, the proof stands in the pudding when you look at money. Virtually anyone, with a little know-how, can begin to develop their brand on the internet at little to no cost, and that, to me, is amazing.  A current manifestation of this growing connection between social media and marketing that comes to mind is the recent Lays potato chip campaign.  Named the "Lays Flavor Contest", the company is reaching out via online platforms to get new flavor ideas for future production.  Not only does this method create a friendly competition amongst consumers, but it increases buzz about Lays, makes the consumer feel involved —like they have a "choice"—, and undoubtedly will boost sales for the company, all while allowing them the feedback they need to make their product better.  While this contest seems light-hearted and creative, it's also surely reducing the cost of any additional research Lays would normally conduct to get these same results.
Howard's other analysis of the reasons to invest include: enhancing intellectual capital, increasing creativity and cross-fertilization, improving decision-making processes with epistemic communities, preserving institutional knowledge, providing a higher quality interaction with your organization, improving retention and loyalty, reducing training and support costs, reducing travel costs and addressing problems quicker, and flattening organizational hierarchies.  Most of these make sense to me, except the point that online communities provide a quality interaction within the organization.  Howard suggests that these communities provide a means for employees to understand decision making and managers on a more personal level. While I can see this being the case with large companies whose employees wouldn't normally have wide open lines of communication, it seems like it could potentially be counter-productive within smaller organizations. Ideally, you would want employees and managers to have that face-to-face interaction and communication to keep relationships positive.  Throwing everyone into a computer community may only swell the "gossip mongering" instead of putting a "human face on decisions".